#25 Why is the postwar period a model for the left and the (far) right?
The left likes the equality and buildup of the welfare state, the right likes the sexism and the racism. Can we have one without the other?
These are edited remarks that I gave in a roundtable at Leiden University on “80 years of Peace in Europe” organised by Maxine David.
What is noteworthy about the post-war period (say 1945-1973) is that both the left and the far-right seem to like it. For many on the left, say people like Bernie Sanders, it is a "golden age" of rapid economic growth, social equality, and the construction of the welfare state in the West —a stark contrast to the high inequality of the present. But we find a similar yearning for this period on the right, and even the far right. When Donald Trump or JD Vance talk about making “America Great Again”, the idealized society they want to return to resembles the 1950s or 1960s: a less diverse society where white men were the undisputed cornerstones, industry was the pillar of the economy, women's primary domain was the home, and the rights of migrants and ethnic minorities were curtailed.
Each side tends to selectively focus on certain aspects. The left champions the economic solidarity and social safety nets, often overlooking the era's deep-seated exclusions. The right praises the perceived social order and traditional hierarchies, ignoring the economic infrastructure and state intervention that underpinned the widespread prosperity. But were the economic achievements of the post-war era in terms of equality inextricably linked to its exclusionary social and political foundations? Could one have existed without the other? Here I outline the architecture of that period, "embedded liberalism," to explore both its successes and the crucial limitations and exclusionary practices
The Architecture of Post-War Prosperity: Embedded Liberalism
The cornerstone of the post-war international economic order was "embedded liberalism". This framework aimed to harmonize domestic economic stability and objectives of inequality reduction with a liberal international system for trade and finance. In essence, it enabled nations to pursue domestic equality and interventionist policies while engaging in an open global economy. This system was substantially supported by the dominance of the US dollar and the economic and military might of the United States.
Unlike the laissez-faire liberalism of the 19th century, embedded liberalism was inherently multilateral yet predicated upon active domestic interventionism. Governments assumed greater responsibility for national social security and economic stability. Key institutions, such as the Bretton Woods system for monetary relations and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) for trade, were established to govern this order. These regimes were designed to shield domestic economies from severe external shocks, permitting measures like short-term financial assistance, exchange rate adjustments for "fundamental disequilibrium," and, importantly, capital controls to manage international financial flows. This empowered states to prioritize full employment and comprehensive social welfare programs. The post-war period saw the development of substantial safety nets covering a wide array of social risks and coordinated industrial relations systems geared towards solidaristic wage growth.
Despite these achievements, the exclusionary nature of the domestic equality realized under embedded liberalism is often overlooked. The system's benefits were not universally distributed, and its stability was, in part, reliant on racial and gender-based exclusions. Whether these exclusionary features were a prerequisite for the system's functioning remains an open question.
Racial Exclusion, Colonialism, and Restrictive Immigration Control
The "social purpose" of embedded liberalism, while advancing welfare for some, was frequently built upon practices of selective social closure, particularly concerning race and migration status.
Institutionalised Racism in the United States: While the US championed the liberal international order, and its economic power was central to the system's operation, this coexisted with deeply entrenched systemic racism domestically. The era's prosperity and social programs did not extend equally to all citizens; African Americans and other minority groups often faced segregation, discrimination, and limited access to the fruits of the "golden age." Domestic and agricultural workers, which were disproportionately black, were for instance excluded from many benefits of the New Deal.
Colonial Dominance Abroad: The post-war period also coincided with the persistence of colonial empires for several European powers. The economic structures of embedded liberalism were intertwined with these inherently unequal and exploitative colonial relationships. Wealth and resources extracted from colonies contributed to the prosperity of the metropoles, while populations in colonized territories were largely excluded from the social compact of embedded liberalism. Some research (e.g by Gurminder Bhambra) even posits that colonial extraction provided a financial basis for the welfare state in colonizing nations.
Exclusionary Immigration Control in Europe: In Western Europe, the burgeoning post-war economies' demand for labour was often met by importing large numbers of migrants workers. These workers, however, were frequently subjected to exclusionary practices. "Guest worker" systems, prominent in countries like Germany and Switzerland, operated on the premise that migrants were temporary. This justified denying them social rights, political participation, and pathways to citizenship. Consequently, a dual labour market emerged where migrants filled essential roles but were kept unorganized, insecure, bereft of political rights, effectively subsidizing the welfare states from which they were largely excluded. This selective social closure was a crucial, albeit often unacknowledged, element in maintaining domestic stability and welfare for the citizen population.
Gender Oppression
The post-war economic order and its associated social policies also frequently reinforced traditional gender roles, thereby limiting women's economic and social autonomy. European nations, facing labour shortages, made choices that reflected and perpetuated gender inequalities.
Countries that opted to recruit migrant labour often did so partly because it minimized the need for short-term public investment in social infrastructure (such as childcare) that would facilitate female labour force participation. This approach helped preserve traditional gender roles and the male breadwinner model. Nations like Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, with their conservative gender norms, relied heavily on "guest workers" and were slow to promote female employment or expand welfare provisions supportive of working women.
Even in countries like Sweden, which moved earlier towards promoting female employment and more equal gender norms, this transition often followed periods of reliance on migrant labour or was a gradual process. The initial framework of embedded liberalism did not inherently challenge gender hierarchies. Instead, the expansion of welfare services like public childcare—crucial for women's workforce participation—often required robust left-wing political mobilization and a significant shift in societal gender norms.
The "social purpose" of embedded liberalism was thus often defined in narrow, nationalistic, and gendered terms. The benefits of economic growth and social security disproportionately accrued to native, male citizens in industrial employment. Understanding these exclusionary foundations is vital for a comprehensive and critical assessment of the post-war "golden age" and whether It can act as a model to aspire to.
References
Afonso, A. (2019). Migrant Workers or Working Women? Comparing Labour Supply Policies in Post-War Europe. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 21(3), 251–269.
Goodman, S. W., & Pepinsky, T. (2020). The Exclusionary Foundations of Embedded Liberalism. International Organization 75(2): 411 - 439
Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.